Sound United has been sold....

H

Hobbit

Senior Audioholic
The point is the sale has not taken place. However Sound United is apparently up for sale. Unless they can show stupendous profitability, then after all the recent changes in ownership, Sound United is now ripe for a private equity buyout.
I'm a little late to the conversation, but I'll jump in here. I'm sure Masimo expects a minimum profit margin. Medical it typically earns the highest with semiconductors/chips coming in behind them. My time at Xilinx, Intel, Philips, and others is they would close or sell off divisions not making >60%. Consumer or prosumer electronics aren't even in this ballpark. When divisions were sold, they usually would end up in a portfolio of a company making niche products without this profit margin expectation. While I don't know Masimo's complete portfolio, it wouldn't surprise me SU is a weak link.

From a personal Pov, I think it's sad the SU owns all these products. It seems that consolidating the brands into one, like GM/Ford/Chrysler did, would really help them out. Which is why I think it's sad that one company owns so many brands. I'd rather see them truly competing against each other without having to answer to the same board.

edit: it wouldn't surprise me if Masimo kept or got something, a division or IP, that they're holding on to.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
What type of Panasonic product are you actually referring to.
Actually i was referring to BD players. I have their top line player. I also have a couple of Panasonic plasma TVs in use, which are still working in the great room and family room systems. However I would not look to repair those at their age, and just replace them.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
I'm a little late to the conversation, but I'll jump in here. I'm sure Masimo expects a minimum profit margin. Medical it typically earns the highest with semiconductors/chips coming in behind them. My time at Xilinx, Intel, Philips, and others is they would close or sell off divisions not making >60%. Consumer or prosumer electronics aren't even in this ballpark. When divisions were sold, they usually would end up in a portfolio of a company making niche products without this profit margin expectation. While I don't know Masimo's complete portfolio, it wouldn't surprise me SU is a weak link.

From a personal Pov, I think it's sad the SU owns all these products. It seems that consolidating the brands into one, like GM/Ford/Chrysler did, would really help them out. Which is why I think it's sad that one company owns so many brands. I'd rather see them truly competing against each other without having to answer to the same board.

edit: it wouldn't surprise me if Masimo kept or got something, a division or IP, that they're holding on to.
That is just confirmation of what I already suspected. Their is not a lot of money in it. The receivers and AVPs are much too complicated and need major simplification.
That room correction and licensing expense should go for a start. That is the wrong place for equalization. The right place is at the speaker itself, and it largely involves correctly setting baffle step compensation for the speaker position in the room. That is actually 99% of what this is all about. My researches have proved that to me.
A targeted approach is far better then that global shotgun approach, and is a major reason for the success of thi AV room.
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Ninja
M

MrBoat

Audioholic Ninja
You nailed this one Mr Boat. My thoughts exactly.

That is why I keep to the minimum devices from the corporate world. I can do much better with the minimum of their corporate nonsense.

Really the only corporate devices in my systems are the TVs and AVPs and the odd disc player. Most of my equipment comes from a time where owners like Peter Walker designed very RELIABLE equipment to gives years and years of reliable service.

I have no speakers from the corporate world. They are al designed and built by me, around drivers from small companies with owners that really do know something about their product.
I build my own computers, HTPC and DAW. I have three wonderful systems that have as little to do with this corporate mayhem as possible.

Last of all this has massively increased the quality of my systems way above the norm. If there is a better system then I don't know of it.

So as far as I'm concerned a pox on all this corporate nonsense the marketers and MBAs. Rogues the lot of them.
I have some speakers and electronics from the globalized corporate world but my favorites are either DIY or antiques from a better time.

Kind of telling how much the tech has consumed itself when they have to push room correction, DACs and yet more channels so hard. I can kind of see why they have to pass these companies around so much. They've used it all up.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Consumer or prosumer electronics aren't even in this ballpark. When divisions were sold, they usually would end up in a portfolio of a company making niche products without this profit margin expectation.
This reminds me of what @M Code said about how giant corporations like Yamaha are not making much money from selling AVR/Amps compared to their other sectors. Yet they continue to sell AVR/Amps anyway.

I never understood why Yamaha (and other companies) would continue making AVR/Amps if they are basically making "peanuts" from selling AVR/Amps. :D

M Code might have explained it, but I can't recall.

So maybe someone could explain it to me. :D
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
There is not a lot of money in it. The receivers and AVPs are much too complicated and need major simplification.
That room correction and licensing expense should go for a start. That is the wrong place for equalization. The right place is at the speaker itself, and it largely involves correctly setting baffle step compensation for the speaker position in the room. That is actually 99% of what this is all about. My researches have proved that to me.
A targeted approach is far better then that global shotgun approach, and is a major reason for the success of thi AV room.
So you propose that companies should stop making AVR/AVP; they should only make powered speakers that have EQ/Amps all stuffed inside each speaker cabinet and charge 2 - 3 times more money than passive speakers?

And this will save the HT market?
 
M

Movie2099

Audioholic General
This reminds me of what @M Code said about how giant corporations like Yamaha are not making much money from selling AVR/Amps compared to their other sectors. Yet they continue to sell AVR/Amps anyway.

I never understood why Yamaha (and other companies) would continue making AVR/Amps if they are basically making "peanuts" from selling AVR/Amps. :D

M Code might have explained it, but I can't recall.

So maybe someone could explain it to me. :D
Denon and Marantz should diversify their portfolio's like Yamaha. Starting coming out with Denon/Marantz Motorcycles, boats, cars, musical instruments, speakers, etc... :p :cool:
 
Tankini

Tankini

Senior Audioholic
So you propose that companies should stop making AVR/AVP; they should only make powered speakers that have EQ/Amps all stuffed inside each speaker cabinet and charge 2 - 3 times more money than passive speakers?

And this will save the HT market?
From what I've researched, Yamaha's audio/video seems to be pulling in millions of net profits.
1712864001537.png
 
Last edited:
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
From what I've researched, Yamaha's audio/video seems to be pulling in millions of net profits.
Right? I'm thinking they gotta be making some profits in the millions from selling AVRs/Amps. They can't be LOSING money, right? :D

I can't remember what M Code said, but I think he said they're just NOT making THAT much profit compared to everything else they have.

I'm thinking Masimo must be making a lot of profits also on selling Marantz, Denon, B&W, right? So the reason they are selling is just because of STOCK prices?
 
Tankini

Tankini

Senior Audioholic
Right? I'm thinking they gotta be making some profits in the millions from selling AVRs/Amps. They can't be LOSING money, right? :D

I can't remember what M Code said, but I think he said they're just NOT making THAT much profit compared to everything else they have.
Its's in the millions, net. :D
 
Tankini

Tankini

Senior Audioholic
So in 2020, audio sales was > $1 Billion.

But in 2023, it went to $810 Million.
Very solid company. Yamaha could buyout, Denon/Marantz/ Onkyo/Pioneer/Anthems Wouldn't even hurt their bottom line. :D

Looking for net, a lot to look over. Yamaha has 3 factory's In Japan alone. They had or still can't say for sure, Rugby and a Soccer team. Very long list of what they have their fingers in.
 
Last edited:
H

Hobbit

Senior Audioholic
This reminds me of what @M Code said about how giant corporations like Yamaha are not making much money from selling AVR/Amps compared to their other sectors. Yet they continue to sell AVR/Amps anyway.

I never understood why Yamaha (and other companies) would continue making AVR/Amps if they are basically making "peanuts" from selling AVR/Amps. :D

M Code might have explained it, but I can't recall.

So maybe someone could explain it to me. :D
The simple answer is if you're a pharmaceutical company and your gross profit margin is 75% (typical for a pharm) owning an electronic retailer that's making a profit margin of 3-5% (typical) drags down your PE ratio. That, in turn drags down your stock price and the net value of your company. Therefore, you sell off the electronic retailer company or spin it off on its own (both generate money). The goal of these companies is to make money for the stockholders by driving the price of the stock up. Also, if the stock price is dragged down by a "peanuts;)" earner it's harder to issue more stock to generate the billions of dollars it takes to develop the next new drug.

Altruistically you'd think they're making good money so it's all good. But that's not how the world works. I've seen divisions of companies I've worked for sold off or shut down for not making the required margins the company required. They were still making good money... There are companies out there that aren't on the bleeding edge that make money by buying these divisions up, or buy the IP to keep making legacy products. But they don't need to spend billions on R&D. It's just a different company model.

Sometimes divisions are just sold off because they don't align with your overall goals. Another company may specialize in what that division did. This did happen to me once and it actually worked out great. We ended up working for a company that specialized in what we did. We filled a hole in their portfolio and our division grew.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
The simple answer is if you're a pharmaceutical company and your gross profit margin is 75% (typical for a pharm) owning an electronic retailer that's making a profit margin of 3-5% (typical) drags down your PE ratio. That, in turn drags down your stock price and the net value of your company. Therefore, you sell off the electronic retailer company or spin it off on its own (both generate money). The goal of these companies is to make money for the stockholders by driving the price of the stock up. Also, if the stock price is dragged down by a "peanuts;)" earner it's harder to issue more stock to generate the billions of dollars it takes to develop the next new drug.

Altruistically you'd think they're making good money so it's all good. But that's not how the world works. I've seen divisions of companies I've worked for sold off or shut down for not making the required margins the company required. They were still making good money... There are companies out there that aren't on the bleeding edge that make money by buying these divisions up, or buy the IP to keep making legacy products. But they don't need to spend billions on R&D. It's just a different company model.

Sometimes divisions are just sold off because they don't align with your overall goals. Another company may specialize in what that division did. This did happen to me once and it actually worked out great. We ended up working for a company that specialized in what we did. We filled a hole in their portfolio and our division grew.
So I assume Yamaha and Sony Home Electronics are making enough profit margins so that they are not dragging down the rest of their giant global company’s stocks/value?

The peanuts earning isn’t significantly doing anything adverse to the giant company value/stock?

But Sound United is dragging down Masimo’s company value/stocks?
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
So I assume Yamaha and Sony Home Electronics are making enough profit margins so that they are not dragging down the rest of their giant global company’s stocks/value?

The peanuts earning isn’t significantly doing anything adverse to the giant company value/stock?

But Sound United is dragging down Masimo’s company value/stocks?
That is likely correct. Sound United is only very, very distantly related from Masimo's core mission. On the other hand home electronics is very much part of Sony's core mission. Yamaha is a bit of an outlier has it has a myriad of core missions of which audio has long been among them.

So the question becomes who can Sound United join a company, and be part of their core mission.

My fear is entry into the prime equity domain and being passed around like a hot potato and this has been accelerating these past years for Sound United.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
So you propose that companies should stop making AVR/AVP; they should only make powered speakers that have EQ/Amps all stuffed inside each speaker cabinet and charge 2 - 3 times more money than passive speakers?

And this will save the HT market?
The trouble is that you have never designed anything I don't think. The fact is that passive speaker components are bulky costly and waste half the amp power or more.

On the other hand standardization of modular amps could be very cost saving. DSP crossovers are now plentiful and can easily be controlled remotely. My work here has shown that whole room Eq is a dead end and poor. Where as voicing a speaker is simpler, cheaper and far more effective. Active speakers allow this this to happen in a very straightforward fashion, and will best any global room Eq by a country mile.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top